• Elections

    From BOB ACKLEY@1:123/140 to ALL on Monday, July 29, 2019 15:19:28
    In theory, the election of public officials is the best way to govern.
    In practice, however, it isn't.

    The reason that elections are no longer the best method of selecting
    public officials is that elections can be (and usually are) rigged.
    The late Josef Stalin reportedly once commented: "It's not who votes
    that counts, it's who counts the votes." Over the past twenty years in
    the United State there have been myriad occurrences of election fraud;
    years ago one precinct reported over 300 votes cast on election day,
    but then the ballot box was opened later there were only fifty ballots
    in it. Unfortunately that was not an isolated occurrence, many
    precincts have reported more votes cast than people who actually voted.

    Another problem with elections in this country is voter suppression.
    Some suppression is done by local officials, but in my view a bigger
    problem is people who hang around polling places for the purpose of intimidating voters.

    Yet another problem with elections in this country is the fact that politicians literally buy peoples' votes by promising them all sorts
    of "free" government "benefits." Many people will reliably vote for
    things they think someone else will have to pay for - and for
    candidates who will promise them those things. Unfortunately
    those "free" government "benefits" have literally bankrupted this
    country's government; the government's funded and unfunded liabilities
    far exceed the value of its assets and any reasonable estimate of its
    future revenue - and that's a pretty good definition of bankruptcy. It
    should also be noted that the government is currently overspending its
    income by more than a trillion dollars a year.

    Some people, particularly but not exclusively those of the leftist
    persuasion, refuse to accept the results of elections and take to the
    streets in protests of election results they don't like - that sort of
    thing used to be called a riot but today it has become a legitimate
    form of political expression. That's one thing I've noted about the
    political left wing in this country - they're all for elections - until
    they lose one, the presidential election of 2016 being a case in point.

    If elections are no longer the best method of selecting public
    officials, how should we do it? My personal preference is to eliminate elections entirely and adopt a random selection process that selectes
    citizens from within the jurisdiction of the office to serve in the
    position for one and only one term of office. This would eliminate
    elected office as a full-time career, eliminate the bribery
    of "campaign contributions," eliminate the endless campaigning for
    office, eliminate legislation designed to put and/or keep politicians
    in office, and destroy the power of the political parties. None of
    those is a bad idea in my opinion. It might also cause students to pay
    a bit more attention in history, civics and government classes.




    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Fido Since 1991 | QWK by Web | BBS.FIDOSYSOP.ORG (1:123/140)
  • From Gerhard Strangar@2:240/2188.575 to BOB ACKLEY on Thursday, August 01, 2019 04:23:57
    Am 29 Jul 19 17:19:28 schrob BOB ACKLEY an ALL zum Thema
    <Elections>

    Over the past twenty years in
    the United State there have been myriad occurrences of election fraud; years ago one precinct reported over 300 votes cast on election day,
    but then the ballot box was opened later there were only fifty ballots
    in it. Unfortunately that was not an isolated occurrence, many
    precincts have reported more votes cast than people who actually voted.

    Isn't all of this public?
    I don't know how it works in the USA, but don't you have volunteers from multiple parties in the polling stations? Don't they have to show the empty ballot boxes to everyone before voting starts? Don't they sit there until all stations close and make sure everyone just puts one ballot into the box? Don't they sort and check them all together in public and then - also in public - count them twice by different persons? Don't the results get published for every polling station?

    Another problem with elections in this country is voter suppression.
    Some suppression is done by local officials, but in my view a bigger problem is people who hang around polling places for the purpose of intimidating voters.

    And by not voting, they would intimidate the ones that you want to select randomly.

    Yet another problem with elections in this country is the fact that politicians literally buy peoples' votes by promising them all sorts
    of "free" government "benefits."

    Don't they lie about that?

    Some people, particularly but not exclusively those of the leftist persuasion, refuse to accept the results of elections

    And rolling dice would be more likely to be accepted? I doubt it.

    If elections are no longer the best method of selecting public
    officials, how should we do it? My personal preference is to eliminate elections entirely and adopt a random selection process that selectes citizens from within the jurisdiction of the office to serve in the position for one and only one term of office.

    I thought you wanted to come up with having the people make every decision by themselves. But random? First of all, how can you make sure, it actually is random? No one can verify if it was randomness that lead to the result. But assuming it was random, what if you select someone who has Alzheimer's or a mentally handicapped person?



    Tschoe mit Oe
    Gerhard
    ---
    * Origin: (2:240/2188.575)
  • From BOB ACKLEY@1:123/140 to GERHARD STRANGAR on Thursday, August 01, 2019 09:46:54
    Am 29 Jul 19 17:19:28 schrob BOB ACKLEY an ALL zum Thema
    <Elections>

    Over the past twenty years in
    the United State there have been myriad occurrences of election
    fraud;
    years ago one precinct reported over 300 votes cast on election
    day,
    but then the ballot box was opened later there were only fifty
    ballots
    in it. Unfortunately that was not an isolated occurrence, many precincts have reported more votes cast than people who actually
    voted.

    Isn't all of this public?

    It's supposed to be.

    I don't know how it works in the USA, but don't you have volunteers
    from
    multiple parties in the polling stations? Don't they have to show the
    empty
    ballot boxes to everyone before voting starts?

    I don't know.

    Don't they sit there until all
    stations close and make sure everyone just puts one ballot into the
    box?

    Supposedly.

    Don't
    they sort and check them all together in public and then - also in
    public -
    count them twice by different persons?

    I don't know.

    Don't the results get published for
    every polling station?

    Not around here. Results are published for the whole county at one
    time, there's no breakout by precinct or polling station.

    Another problem with elections in this country is voter
    suppression.
    Some suppression is done by local officials, but in my view a
    bigger
    problem is people who hang around polling places for the purpose
    of
    intimidating voters.

    And by not voting, they would intimidate the ones that you want to
    select
    randomly.

    Yet another problem with elections in this country is the fact
    that
    politicians literally buy peoples' votes by promising them all
    sorts
    of "free" government "benefits."

    Don't they lie about that?

    Politicians lie about EVERYTHING, all the time.

    Some people, particularly but not exclusively those of the
    leftist
    persuasion, refuse to accept the results of elections

    And rolling dice would be more likely to be accepted? I doubt it.

    If elections are no longer the best method of selecting public officials, how should we do it? My personal preference is to
    eliminate
    elections entirely and adopt a random selection process that
    selectes
    citizens from within the jurisdiction of the office to serve in
    the
    position for one and only one term of office.

    I thought you wanted to come up with having the people make every
    decision by
    themselves. But random? First of all, how can you make sure, it
    actually is
    random? No one can verify if it was randomness that lead to the
    result. But
    assuming it was random, what if you select someone who has
    Alzheimer's or a
    mentally handicapped person?

    They wouldn't be in the pool of eligibles.

    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Fido Since 1991 | QWK by Web | BBS.FIDOSYSOP.ORG (1:123/140)